Friday, 9 November 2012

How can THC want 'Expanded' A96 Corridor in NPF3 when there's no real sign of a contributions protocol

Compare and contrast the statements - which I have put into a table below and taken from the new DPS (Development Plan Scheme) - regarding two developer contributions protocols.The Planning Authority should have had the 'A96 Corridor Developer Contributions' guidance in place by now, why is it still dragging its heals on this? A special developer contributions protocol was an integral part of the 'A96 Corridor Growth Development Framework' when it was 'approved' and this special contributions protocol was to be in place at the adoption of the HwLDP.

The following text was sent by me, as part of an email to councillors, in September 2012, to tie in with the consideration of the 'New town' Planning Application:

....The ‘A96 Growth
Corridor Development Framework’ was placed before the PEDC on
Wednesday 26
September 2007.
BUT, what is particularly important
is that which was stated within the Committee Report (dated 19 September
2007) with respect to developer
contributions (I have underlined statements that I consider
pertinent):

5.1 Section 8 of
the Framework in Appendix 2 is fundamental to the success of development in the
A96 Corridor. It represents a strategic response to the need for key
infrastructure and provides a blueprint for ensuring that investment happens in
the right places at the right times. The use of the protocols will be a
prerequisite for development proposals which come forward. The majority of
development interests have broadly welcomed the approach taken by the Council,
although there are a number of outstanding issues over the overall costs and the
means of delivery. These outstanding issues will be the basis of ongoing
negotiation with the different development interests as they come forward and as
the levels of public funding contributions become clearer.

5.2 Around £326m of
strategic infrastructure investment (excluding water and sewerage) is required
to facilitate development across the Corridor. About 70% of this will be
funded from the development process. This will require public subsidy to meet
regional investment requirements of £56m. The remaining 30% would require
public funding in areas of transport, schooling and landscape/park provision.
This means that the overall public/private split would require £151m (46%) of
public investment and £175m (54%) of private contribution. This will be
provided through the levels of contributions set out in Section 8 of the
document.

In line with the
approach taken elsewhere in Inverness and throughout the
country, developer contributions of between £7,000 and £11,000 per house have
been established depending on the requirements for infrastructure within each
development zone. Other land uses will also be expected to contribute, again in
line with the content of the protocols. Section 9 of the Framework identifies
as a key action that there should be regular quarterly updates of the
development funding protocol and delivery costings should be
maintained.

5.3 The delivery of infrastructure
through the protocols will be complex, but what has been established to date
represents the first step in a welcome change to the way that the private and
public sectors co-operate in the delivery of facilities or physical works which
need to be provided to make better places. In that context, Committee
approval is sought for the developer contributions protocols.

Well the HwLDP has been adopted and still not sign of this special protocol.I have become tired and fed up of pointing out to the planning authority that this should be in place and the planning authority seems quite empowered to ignore my protestations.The Planning Authority is continuing to promote the A96 Corridor and associated developments as 'National' through a third National Planning Framework (The A96 Corridor only managed to be placed as a 'Spatial Perspective' in the current NPF2). Evidence of private and public sector co-operation should be far more evident before inclusion and expansion of the A96 Corridor is considered through any future National Planning Framework.

Title of Supplementary
Guidance

Purpose
and Progress

Target
Date

Developer
Contributions

Provides
guidance on how, when and why we negotiate contributions from development.
This will bring together all of our existing guidance on developer contributions
and our affordable housing supplementary guidance. We carried out consultation
on this document Summer 2012.

A revised
document will be reported to the PED Committee in January 2013.

A96
Corridor Developer

Contributions

Sets out
our procedure for securing contributions
from developers towards long-term infrastructure within the A96 Corridor.